Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.

Not a point I was making but Ok and I agree mate, I think that's the basis of the debate really.

Unfortunately you're probably right, guarantee's are for election campaigns and as all Australians know, our governments often go back on election promises.

That's a question I often ask too? I think the answer is none, except for referendum's

Quote: Originally Posted by BCXtreme

Is there a mechanism by which the people can amend their constitution to override "lesser" laws?

To put it very loosely - first we must get Bill submitted to parliament (this is the hardest part and can either be a Draft Bill, a Government Public Bil or a Private Member Public Bill). This goes through all the usual process that must end in assent (i.e. passed by both houses). Within 6 months the Bill must be put to a referendum where we all get to vote on it. If the vote succeeds in a double-majority i.e. majority of votes in a majority of states (except NT and I can't remember why, somehow they are included in the national total) and a National YES vote majority then it can be ratified and with 28 days must be commenced.

So In short we must get the government to agree to not be dodgy first and then make that law..... this will never happen.... so I guess we're stuffed.

-Timo

Ouch ... in the States we have a process that can be used to amend our constitution without any support/agreement from the Federal government at all. Yeah, if everything has to go through the parliament, that's going to be difficult to deal with. Unless you could just get a simple free speech provision passed, and then any Internet censorship laws could be challenged in court (if you have such a system).

We have the Bill of Rights over here, as you're aware, but all it's doing is slowing these laws down a little. If we can get the censorship advocates out of public office over here (the ones that are apologizing to China), then we'll have a chance, and maybe we'll even be able to influence other nations away from these dangerous filter systems.

It's worth hoping for at least...

P.S. This whole topic has me wondering exactly HOW the "no political discussion" rule is applied. It's obviously a fine line (which I hope I'm not crossing).

The line is probably drawn at political debates such as Democrats vs. Republicans. This topic hasn't had heavy debate at all yet, so I think we all should be fine.

However if it only blocks kids access to things that are strictly AO, as well as racism, child pornography, death sites and all the nasties that you wouldn't want your kids or neighbors involved in AND as long as the government is totally transparent about the blocked sites.

How can they be transparent? If something is blocked, they can't show you it for transparency, that would be breaking their own rules. Then they can claim anything is "bad" and nobody would be able to tell since it was off limits to the public. They could use this to suppress free speech or anything they want in the name of protecting the public, exactly like China does. And how would the computer know if you're a kid or not? Would you have to sign in to tell you're an adult? Or would there be additional software needed to be installed?